Christensen v. Swenson
Citation and Court
874 P.2d 125 (Utah 1994), Supreme Court of Utah
Facts
Swenson was a security guard employed by Burns International Security Services at a Geneva Steel plant. During her thirty-minute unpaid lunch break, she drove off plant property to get food at a nearby café, as no cafeteria was available on site. On her return, she rear-ended Christensen’s car while re-entering the plant property. Christensen sued Burns under respondeat superior.
Issue
Whether Swenson was acting within the scope of her employment when the accident occurred, making Burns vicariously liable.
Holding
The court held that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding scope of employment and reversed the summary judgment for Burns, finding that a jury could conclude Swenson was acting within the scope of her employment.
Rule / Doctrine
Under respondeat superior, an employee acts within the scope of employment if: (1) the conduct is of the general kind the employee is hired to perform; (2) the conduct occurs substantially within the hours and space limits of the employment; and (3) the conduct is motivated at least in part by the purpose of serving the employer’s interests. Getting food during a short break at a post where no on-site food is available may satisfy this test.
Significance
Christensen v. Swenson demonstrates that scope-of-employment analysis is highly fact-specific and that personal errands during very short breaks may still fall within the scope of employment where the break is closely tied to the employment context. It is frequently contrasted with frolic-and-detour cases.